What do you think will be the imapct of B2L tax rises?

cells

if two people get on fine but want a divorce anyway then they are not allowed?

wotsthat

cells wrote: »

if two people get on fine but want a divorce anyway then they are not allowed?

You'd think but it's the only contract I can think of where the parties aren't allowed to break it by mutual consent.

There has to be evidence of adultery, desertion or long term separation. Most people go for the pantomime of unreasonable behaviour and make something up to get it over with.

lisyloo

If that's the case half of people getting divorced are falsifying statements of truth because they're not allowed to mutually agree to end the marriage contract.

No - incorrect.
You can mutually end a marriage if it has broken down.

What is a contempt of court is signing a statement of truth saying that it has broken down when it's not true.

Why don't you research it rather than just making stuff up?

and a case like this wouldn't get before a court because it's unlikely to get past any evidential standard

We have joint accounts, a jointly owned property, joint vehicle insurances, wills, EPAs, pension trusts, a joint company, life insurance, dividend payments - absolutely shed loads of paper trail.

The risks are non-existent assuming some fairly basic steps are taken.

Looks like quite a lot of work to me to cover that lot up (not that I'm interested in doing it).

people do this legally if they hate each other but it's illegal if they don't?

Yes - the ONLY legal reason for divorce us that your marriage has broken down (through desertion, adultery, unreasonable behaviour or seperation) - look it up yourself or see links below.
If you sign the decree for the court of the statement of truth outside court and it's false then it's perjury or contempt of court - I've reasearch that, you haven't.

If you find something otherwise please post it up.

lisyloo

if two people get on fine but want a divorce anyway then they are not allowed?

Correct - you can only get divorced if the relationship has broken down and you need to confirm formally that it's the case.
Look it up.

https://www.gov.uk/divorce/overview
You can get a divorce if you have been married at least a year and your relationship has permanently broken down.

http://findlaw.co.uk/law/family/divorce_and_dissolution/500176.html
There is only one ground for divorce in England and Wales: irretrievable breakdown of marriage.

http://www.lawpack.co.uk/separation-and-divorce/articles/article925.asp
There is only one basic ground for divorce: the irretrievable breakdown of the marriage.

http://www.lawdonut.co.uk/law/personal-law/divorce-separation-cohabitation/divorce-and-separation-faqs
You can only get divorced if you can satisfy the court that the marriage has broken down irretrievably.

If you find something otherwise please post it up.

lisyloo

There has to be evidence of adultery, desertion or long term separation.

No incorrect.
You don't have to prove it but you do have to sign to say it's true.

Why are you just making stuff like this up?
My reasons are posted with links but you are just making up inorrect statements.
Are you having a bad day?

If you have some links that dispute what I've posted then please put them up and we can debate them.

Graham_Devon

Conrad wrote: »

Almost no one gets caught round here, the gains far outweigh the risk.

Crieky, if someone actually investigated your client base we'd likely half the UK's debt the way you go on!

wotsthat

lisyloo wrote: »

No incorrect.
You don't have to prove it but you do have to sign to say it's true.

Why are you just making stuff like this up?
My reasons are posted with links but you are just making up inorrect statements.
Are you having a bad day?

If you have some links that dispute what I've posted then please put them up and we can debate them.

Semantics really. Signing to say something is true is accepted as proof in this case.

If someone says something is true, has satisfied a court and an untruth is impossible to prove then, to all intents and purposes, it is true or doesn't matter.

I can't pinpoint why I wouldn't have a problem with a couple getting divorced for tax reasons when, for example, I wouldn't dream of inflating my pay to get a mortgage (for my first mortgage my boss asked me what I wanted him to say!) but my colleagues considered this inconsequential.

Someone higher moral mountain might have an insight.

wotsthat

Graham_Devon wrote: »

Crieky, if someone actually investigated your client base we'd likely half the UK's debt the way you go on!

When refugees arrive in Europe on rubber dingys I think they get Conrad's business card in the welcome pack.

Thrugelmir

Conrad wrote: »

You're joking, cash is king.


Cab drivers, roofers, carpenters, the list is endless.

Not joking at all. People tend to stop smiling once they come under the spotlight. Hiding thousands of pounds of cash from the eyes of the tax man isn't that easy.

wotsthat

Thrugelmir wrote: »

Not joking at all. People tend to stop smiling once they come under the spotlight. Hiding thousands of pounds of cash from the eyes of the tax man isn't that easy.

I think what he's saying is, despite all the rules, there is inadequate enforcement so the majority of his clients don't even know a spotlight exists let alone find themselves underneath it.

The money is hidden in plain sight - no one is looking for it.